Kerala Court November 1971 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indo-marine Agencies
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-1971
Reported in: [1973]87ITR41(Ker)
Govindan Nair, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the department. The question referred is in these terms : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in directing that export profit rebate has to be allowed to the assessee-firm also in addition to that allowed to the partners ?'2. The year of assessment is 1963-64 and the accounting period is that which ended on March 31, 1963. The export profit rebate is allowable under Clause (i) of Sub-section (5) of Section 2 of the Finance Act, 1963. That clause runs as follows :' (5) In respect of any assessment for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1963- (i) an assessee being an Indian company or any other company which has made the prescribed arrangements for the declaration and payment of dividends within India or an assessee (other than a company) whose total income includes any profits and gains deriv...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Late M. Sankaran Nair (by Legal Heir P.V. ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-1971
Reported in: [1972]85ITR396(Ker)
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. The question referred to this court under Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, at the instance of the Commissioner of Gift-tax, Kerala, Ernakulam, is the following : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the gift is exempt under Section 5(1)(xiv) of the Gift tax Act, 1958 ?' 2. The assessee, M. Sankaran Nair, now deceased, was running a proprietary business in the purchase and sale of yarn. On July 1, 1964, he transferred a sum of Rs. 50,000 out of his capital account in the business to his five children, and converted his proprietary business into a partnership concern by taking his major son. P. V. Harikrishnan, as partner and by admitting the remaining four minor children to the benefits of partnership. The partnership deed is annexure 'A'. 3. In the gift-tax return for the assessment year 1965-66, the assessee showed the total value of the gift at Rs. 50,000. The Gift-tax Officer t...
P. Chandrasekhara Pillai Vs. the Accountant-general and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-1971
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ86Ker
T.C. Raghavan, C.J.1. The appellants in these writ appeals were upper division clerks in the office of the Accountant-General. Twenty per cent of the posts of upper division clerks were placed in the senior grade ; and promotion to those posts was regulated by paragraph 224 of the Manual of Standing Orders relating to that office. There was a Commission of Enquiry on Emoluments and Conditions of Service of the Central Government Employees; and the Commission made certain recommendations in 1959. Ultimately, paragraph 224 of the manual was reconstructed. Ext. P6 in one of the writ petitions giving rise to these appeals gives the original paragraph 224 and paragraphs 224A and 224B, while Ext. P7 gives the reconstructed paragraph 224. The Accountant-General, the head of the office, and two senior officers, the Deputy Accountant-General and the Deputy Controller of Accounts, were constituted a Departmental Selection Committee; and the committee made the selection to these up-graded posts, ...
Chembra Peak Estates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-1971
Reported in: [1972]85ITR401(Ker)
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. This reference raises the question of interpretation of Section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was deleted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1967, with effect from the 1st April, 1968, 2. At the instance of the assessee, Chembra Peak Estates Ltd., Coimbatore, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench,, referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to relief under Section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 3. The assessee is a public limited company owning tea and coffee plantations in Wynad District. During the previous year ending March 31, 1964, relevant to the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee claimed rebate under Section 84(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on a sum of Rs. 48,044 being the profits from the manufacture of tea in his newly established factory in Elstone division. The p...
Kerala Coir Works Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and anr ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-1971
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ82Ker
T.C. Raghavan, C.J.1. The short question in these writ appeals is whether industries manufacturing alath rope will come within the entry 'coir (excluding the spinning sector) industry' in Shedule I to the Employees' Provident Funds Act. A learned Judge of This Court has dismissed the writ petitions giving rise to these appeals answering the question in the affirmative.2. The word 'alath' (also 'alass') is of Arabic origin and the expression 'alath rope' means a special variety of rope much thicker in core than the ordinary types of coir rope, and the process of making alath rope is detailed in paragraph 3 of the counter-affidavit. (This is not disputed too.) Cocoanut fibre, made out of cocoanut husk, is spun into coir yarn called 'choodi' locally; and this is generally a cottage industry in Kerala. The appellants in these cases purchase such coir yarn from the open market and the yarn so purchased is being used in their factories for making alath rope. The coir yarn is first rolled or ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ithappiri and George
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-17-1971
Reported in: [1973]88ITR332(Ker)
1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961, at the instance of the department. The assessee is a firm. The year of assessment is 1965-66, the corresponding accounting period being that ended on March 31, 1965. The question referred is :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the assessee-firm is entitled to registration under Section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1965-66 ' 2. During the accounting period a partnership deed was entered into by the assessee-firm on March 22, 1965. The partnership deed is annexure 'A'. The relevant paragraph of the partnership deed for the purpose of this case is paragraph 6, which is in these terms : ' 6. The net profit of the business after adjustments shall be divided among the partners as shown below. 1. M.O. Ithappiri 30 Np. in the rupee2. T.V. George 30 Np. in the rupee3. M.I. Leelamma 20 Np. in the rupee4. M.I. John ...
T.K. Joseph and anr. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-17-1971
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ76Ker
P. Govindan Nair, J.1. I have read the judgment of Isaac, J. I agree, but would like to add a few words of my own, The facts have been stated in the judgment of Isaac, J.2. The short question is whether the 4th respondent is entitled to claim the benefit of the proviso to Rule 27(a) and (b) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). I shall extract the Rule 27(a) and (b) and the proviso:27. Seniority.-(a) Seniority of a person in a service, class, category or grade shall, unless he has been reduced to a lower rank as punishment, be determined by the date of the order of his first appointment to such service, class, category or grade. If any portion of the service of such person does not count towards probation under the rules, his seniority shall be determined by the date of commencement of his service which counts towards probation,(b) The appointing authority shall, at the time of passing an order appointing two or more persons si...
Alagappa Textiles (Cochin) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-1971
Reported in: [1974]93ITR406(Ker)
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J.1. This is a common reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench 'B', arising out of two applications filed by the assessee, Alagappa Textiles (Cochin) Ltd. The question referred for decision is:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in disallowing the claim of the assessee for deduction of Rs. 1,03,547 and Rs. 18,294 from the income of the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 as not an admissible business expenditure under Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60, the accounting years being the calendar years 1957 and 1958.3. The assessee is a public limited company carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of yarn and having its registered office at Alagappanagar, Kerala State. The assessee entered into an agreement dated November 10, 1955, with Ka...
A.D.M. Stubbings Vs. Shellamuthu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-1971
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ285Ker
ORDERK. Sadasivan, J.1. The revision petitioners are accused in C.C. 66 of 1971 on the file of the First Class Magistrate's Court, Devicolam. They represent the Chokkanadu Estate, Kanan Devan Hills. Against them the complaint was preferred by one Shellamuthu under Section 500, I.P.C., alleging that the revision petitioners published defamatory imputations against him intending to harm his reputation. He was dismissed from the service of the estate as it was reported to the estate that firewood was stolen by him from the estate and sold in the market. The dismissal was preceded by an inquiry by the management at which it was found that the charge levelled against the respondent was true. After the dismissal he filed the present complaint before the Magistrate alleging that the imputation of theft made against him was made with the malicious intention of injuring his reputation and lowering him in the eyes of the public and the members of the S.I.P. Union, Munnar, of which he was an offi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.M. Paily Pillai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR516(Ker)
Govindan Nair, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The question referred is in these terms :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a true construction of the deed dated March 22, 1963, the Tribunal was right in holding that the deed does not evidence a transfer otherwise than for adequate consideration within the meaning of Section 64(iv) of the Income-tax Act ?'2. The year of assessment is 1964-65 relating to the accounting period that ended on March 31, 1964. On the 22nd of March, 1963, the assessee executed a document in favour of his minor son. This document is in Malayalam, which is annexure 'A' to the statement of the case. The agreed translation of this document is given in paragraph 2 of the order of the Tribunal and it reads as follows:'This deed of gift is executed on the twenty second day of March, 1963, in favour of Baby, son of Paily, aged 14, residing at Parumpillil in Elamkulam Kara in Aikkaranad South ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »